"The more you tighten your grip the more star systems will slip through your fingers"

Microsoft's hopes of controlling the
open document world were nearing fruition after the International Standards Organization finally certified its OOXML standard
at the start of April. The ISO had already ratified ODF, the competitive
open-source format from the Organization for the Advancement of Structured
Information Standards (OASIS) used heavily in Linux, but Microsoft faced a
lengthy struggle to try to get its own format recognized. Without
certification it would be tough to push the format as a legitimate open
document option.

Microsoft had good reason to want to control the world of open documents.
As users switch platforms and software more and more, and use an increasing
amount of open source solutions, the need for a non-software specific format
has surfaced. Microsoft hoped that by making its own proprietary
open-file format the preferred standard it could seize control of this budding
field.

However, to Microsoft's anger, the process has now been held up by complaints. Following rumors
that Microsoft pushed the vote through and used underhanded tactics to suppress
dissent, Brazil, India, South Africa, and Venezuela lent such claims credence
by filing complaints against the ratification.

The ratification cannot go forward until these complaints are heard, and they
must be voiced before the end of June. The final decision of how to react
to them will be handed to two management committees. India in particular
was quite vocal in its opposition. An open letter, written by a member of the technical
standardization committee in India, states that Microsoft's long and ambiguous
proposed specification left it unclear what was being implemented. He
says this means that Microsoft can implement the new format however it wants,
ruining the whole reason for ISO -- to promote openness.

He also accuses Microsoft of running a careful concerted smear campaign that
undercut the Indian concerns. He states:

Microsoft started filing complaints to various Indian
authorities in early March 2008, claiming bias on part of several members of
the committee because of their presumed membership of a group called ‘ODF Alliance
India’. My Institution and its representatives are part of the group which has
been falsely implicated in these complaints. Worse, the complaints have painted
these organizations and their representatives, including the Indian delegation
which attended the BRM, as acting against the Indian National interests. This
is the most derogatory accusation to any Indian, amounting, personally for me
at least, to intolerable blasphemy.

In the
letter he alleges that Microsoft pressured the Indian national government to
change its stance, and likely did so with other national governments as
well. He states that Microsoft behaved in a way "amounting to
interfering with the governance process of a sovereign country." He
concludes, "I would like to assure all colleagues and other readers that
my intentions are purely to respond to the grave provocation caused by the
actions of Microsoft."

Meanwhile ODF creators OASIS tried to steal a bit of the spotlight calling for an
"implementation, interoperability, and conformity" technical
committee to continue ODF's openness and quality. The entity plans on
trying to bring ISO or the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) into the
project. Surprisingly Microsoft has expressed interest in joining the
committee, igniting many conspiracy theories on the internet.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Consider: Microsoft publishes the standard, but conveniently "accidentally" withholds parts of the standard. Other companies make products around the published standard and just before they go on sale, OOPS! There is more to the standard. But, oh by the way, the new Office 2009 supports the FULL standard. Other office suites reputations take a hit and nobody bothers to switch from Office.

That is a possibility. Is that what really will happen? Who knows. What we do know is that Microsoft wanted its open standard to be accepted so bad they bribed to have it ratified. Why would any company spend lots of money if they didn't see some gain in the future? It is all about control.

The ISO (and organizations like it) exist purely to stop these kinds of things. When they ratify a STANDARD, it is just that. Full compliance means full compliance with whatever document is published by said standards committee about that standard.

If a company makes improvements or changes to that standard, they no longer follow the standard, at which point they now have their own proprietary standard.

Consumers can then make the choice who they want to support. If they decide that Microsoft offers the better solution (which, with Office 2007, Microsoft CLEARLY has the best office suite on the market), then they'll buy the Microsoft product.

most specifically complete differences within the OOXML standard,It's clearly rushed and developed by 3 completely autonomous groups.OOXML standard includes no Macro scripting ability paving the need for XLA and XLL (Proprietory Excel Automation Format) use one of these in Office 2007 and you no longer have a functional OOXML file. You have OOXML shell that is useless in alternative products.

quote: The ISO (and organizations like it) exist purely to stop these kinds of things.

For this reason there are great protests as to the inclusion of OOXML,I don't remember such protests over ODF's inclusion or even the PDF file format.

quote: If a company makes improvements or changes to that standard, they no longer follow the standard, at which point they now have their own proprietary standard.

No one doubts that Microsoft won't be able to single handedly internally change sections of OOXML file format in Office 2009 withoutcausing a rucus.However what would be the consequences of such a move? Can ISO fine them? Prosecute them? Remove ISO status?Thats like taking the empty candy wrapper from a thieving child, they have already had the sweets (in this case adoption of business)

Please take note of thisThe standard is long, with the version submitted to ISO comprising 6546 pages. OpenDocument specification is 867 pages in length and achieves the same goals

What would be the cost of developing software to support 6546 pages of specifications?How long would it take to build an Office 2007 competitor that supports 6546 pages of OOXML?Would it be practical for any company to spend hundreds and thousands of dollars over years of developments to release a competing Office Suite?

quote:Consider: Microsoft publishes the standard, but conveniently "accidentally" withholds parts of the standard.

This is unnecessarily conspiratorial and malevolent.

Far more likely, is simply trying to make sure that the document standard supports well all the features you want to include in your document application.

Also, previous knocks against .doc are ill-conceived. That format has been reverse-engineered to the yin-yang. (As has been .xls.) It is limits to app engineering, not understanding of the spec, that limits the degree of compatability. Something like OpenOffice seems to be quite compatible for Excel .xls and PowerPoint docs, but less so for Word docs. Word processing is hard.

I will be absolutely astounded if any of these "open formats" in word processing actually lead to better cross-application compatibility than exists today. If anything, the "all things to all people, platforms, and applications" is likely to make things worse, not better.

quote: Consider: Microsoft publishes the standard, but conveniently "accidentally" withholds parts of the standard. Other companies make products around the published standard and just before they go on sale, OOPS! There is more to the standard. But, oh by the way, the new Office 2009 supports the FULL standard. Other office suites reputations take a hit and nobody bothers to switch from Office.

Welcome to Office 2007 and the docx, pptx, pdfx, wpsx... granted they are not OPEN formats but this is exactly what Microsoft has in mind... a format that suits them and gives them some sort of edge or step up above other products and is not 100% compatible with other office products. As it is right now you need the File Format Converter from the MS website just to convert something from docx to doc to be able to open and use in other office programs.this is BAD for the open format process and is only going to cause problems.

Recently, a number of governments around the world have noticed that they can no longer easily open the documents they mad 15 years earlier. These governments have expressed concerns that in another 50 years it may be completely impossible, without a huge reverse engineering project, and they want to preserve their documents for longer than that. They have therefore been thinking about imposing a rule that all their documents must be created using an open standard, so that 50 years from now people will know exactly how to read their documents. And of course, that rule would have to extend to all the companies that do business with that government.

When you take into consideration how global todays economy is, even if only a few countries end up doing this it could cause a ripple effect causing large numbers of people to stop buying MS Office, which is their #1 cashcow. So you can see why it's in MS's best interest to convince these governments that Office uses an open standard.